In a highly contentious move, Missouri’s Attorney General has proposed seizing Chinese assets throughout the U.S. to recover a $24.5 billion judgment from a lawsuit linked to the COVID-19 pandemic. This suit accused China of hoarding personal protective equipment, causing detrimental effects in Missouri. While Missouri’s claim has been supported by a U.S. federal court ruling, experts are skeptical about the feasibility of collecting the damages, with one expert dismissively stating, “Good luck with that.”
China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has dismissed the recent ruling from a U.S. judge, which sided with Missouri’s allegations, branding the lawsuit as “absurd.” Since its filing in 2020, China did not engage with the proceedings, including a brief trial that took place in January. Missouri’s Attorney General, Andrew Bailey, lauded the decision as a pivotal moment in holding China accountable for the pandemic’s economic impact in the U.S. He declared that, should China refuse to pay, the state would confiscate Chinese-owned assets, such as farmland, even if such assets are located outside of Missouri.
“These assets are not confined to Missouri; they can be anywhere in the United States,” Bailey stated. Although the action is not a collaborative effort with other states, Bailey has encouraged others to pursue similar accountability against China.
Historically, international disputes of this nature are typically addressed through negotiations or via federal government action. Paul Nolette, a political scientist at Marquette University, warned that individual states acting independently might complicate diplomatic relations. He remarked that the likelihood of Missouri actually collecting any funds is slim.
Duncan Levin, an attorney with experience in representing foreign nations in U.S. courts, labeled Bailey’s statements as mere publicity. He pointed out the lack of clarity on whether the Chinese government or entities involved in the case own any Missouri assets. Even if assets exist, Levin doubted Missouri’s capacity to seize them beyond state lines, noting the complexity and time involved in such legal procedures.
The lawsuit was initially filed by Bailey’s predecessor, Eric Schmitt, who is now in the U.S. Senate. Schmitt’s departure led to Bailey’s appointment as attorney general by Republican Governor Mike Parson.
China has criticized these legal pursuits, arguing they fall outside the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. The Ministry also highlighted the perceived misuse of legal action to malign China, emphasizing that such strategies will not succeed. The Ministry maintained that China plans to take reciprocal actions under international law to protect its interests.
Potential responses from China could include imposing sanctions on Missouri companies involved in the Chinese market or taking legal measures against them domestically. The legal precedent of a state’s authority to claim reparations from another nation is questionable, as indicated by Nolette.
U.S. District Judge Stephen Limbaugh previously ruled to dismiss the lawsuit in 2022, but an appellate court later permitted parts of it to continue. Limbaugh’s acceptance of Missouri’s damage estimates, compounded to exceed $8 billion and tripled under federal statute, represents a significant increase in financial expectations.
Bailey expressed his intentions post-ruling to recover the judgment by targeting Chinese-owned assets, reiterating the state’s commitment to pursuing what he perceives as owed damages.
